On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 00:18:16 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:23:18 -0500, John Gaquin wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message

And, in case you didn't notice, *if* this story pans out true, this
President committed an impeachable offense.

If what you posit is true -- and I'll stipulate for the moment -- then he
will have to be impeached side by side with at least a majority of the
Senate Intelligence Committee seated at that time, as they approved the
surveillance activity as essential security measures. Personally, I don't
think this event would meet the High Crimes test.

I have read where the some in Congress had been briefed, but nowhere that
approval was given. As for the High Crimes test, in 1972, when Nixon
claimed he had the power to wiretap, the Supreme Court unanimously
rejected that notion. Since that time, Congress, the body that makes the
law, has clarified the situation with the 1978 Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act. Wiretapping Americans, without a warrant, puts the
President clearly at odds with the will of Congress. As impeachment
proceedings are political, the point is probably moot, but a
Constitutional crisis does meet the High Crimes and Misdemeanors test.

If the Congressmen had disapproved, don't you think you'd have heard their disapprovals ringing in
the hallowed halls of the Senate a long time ago?

I *am* glad to see that you will at least admit that some in Congress were involved.
--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****